"If the galleries are closed - so that someone needs."
 

Why close the gallery, can someone explain?

What is this process that?

And who needs it?


Don't panic!
Open letter to Helen Selina

Will explain all the time, in a quick time. If there is a conspiracy to samolikvi datsiyu and bankruptcy and is antipiar on contemporary art , then there is a conspiracy , and on the other , more reliable way to make money. Will bid on new artists , we forget about Anya acorn , etc. Maybe start a new, more intelligent aktualschikov pyramid , with the support of the State or some other sponsors. I think these accidents only increased the appetite .

Gelman explained here:

According to the letter, the gallery decided to go the way of the development cost of money.

To be in the mainstream of contemporary currents <! - ~ 1 ~ ->

One of the vulnerabilities in the areas that it focuses on the rich, not the middle class. It's like a bank, which rests not on a thousand medium-sized, and the three major contributors. Two are gone and all ...

Posted 3 minutes
Talk of state support in some form already underway. Here's what Sergey wrote on Kapkov Snob: "Various experts say that market collectible in the world today is low. Demand is falling, but it is wavy process. To this must be treated philosophically today, so tomorrow will be different. Only gallery that never closed, and rather successfully operate - antique. As for the question of the closure and reformatting contemporary art galleries, here I see the following risks: Gallery - a representative of the artists, galleries open up new names and give them a start in life. It is best exhibited in galleries artists from those who are in the world today - so this picture determines what work will be filled with museums in the future. Galleries, including bringing up the audience, teach them to walk to the exhibition, form the culture. Therefore, if the galleries are closed - it does not just mean that the market does not, it will also mean that the place to meet the artist and the viewer does not.

One of the outputs of the situation I see in that part of the state participated in the financing of exhibitions and helped expand the presence of Russian galleries on such iconic venues as the Art Basel in Miami and many others. I do not think that subsidies for "kill" the market, rather the opposite - an investment in the future because the demand for art, too, need to grow. "
Source: http://www.snob.ru/selected/entry/48...mmentId=478901

<! - ~ 1 ~ ->
Indeed, as museums cope without galleries.
Well, about the " teach them to walk to the exhibition , form the culture ..." - No comments.
In general, repair of the theater of a billion $, for small projects.

The collector is not necessarily a very rich man . Great artists in their youth are very cheap , you just have to know them, but it does take a lot of money is not as much love for art.
Error orientation of the rich merchants in the sector leads to a narrowing of possible buyers. This concerns the so-called modern and Islands, which can hardly be called art. It has become difficult to vtyuhivat that's close.

 
And all the modern (relatively) in the museums of art acquired in his time with the CX-collective exhibitions, personal.

Now perform the functions of CX is just the gallery.

Is not it?

No!
These functions are performed by CX.

What you say!
Really?
<! - ~ 7 ~ ->

Then give me the total number of exhibitions in Moscow Union of Artists of 20,011 per year.

And I'll give you back the numbers of exhibitions in galleries in Moscow.

And compare.
<! - ~ 1 ~ ->